“An advert for a computer game that contained ‘scenes of graphic violence’ involving fighting between a man and several women wearing ‘sexually provocative clothing’ was not likely to cause widespread offence or distress to viewers, was not socially irresponsible and did not glamorise violence against women, the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has ruled.”

“Retailers that supply age-rated video games to children who are below the specified age could face up to six months in jail and a £5,000 fine under a new age classification regime in operation in the UK.”

“Media regulator Ofcom has launched an investigation into how ITV mistakenly included video game footage in a documentary that supposedly showed the IRA shooting down a helicopter with weapons supplied by Muammar Gaddafi.”

“In relation to the offence of selling a device which is primarily designed, produced, or adapted for the purpose of enabling or facilitating the circumvention of effective technological measures, it must be established that there has been copying of the whole or a substantial part of a copyright work, but it was not necessary to consider a computer game as a whole because copyright also subsisted in the various drawings which resulted in the images shown on the television screen or monitor.”

“The computer games industry is launching a crackdown on people who illegally download games from the internet by writing to 25,000 people in Britain suspected of illegally sharing files and asking them to pay £300 immediately to avoid any further legal action.”

“Where do the plans for new rules come from? Earlier this year, Tanya Byron, a psychologist advising the Government, said that video game ratings should to be overhauled to make them easier for parents and children to understand.”

“A man who ran a business selling computer chips that helped games consoles play pirated games has had his conviction for copyright infringement overturned on appeal. The High Court judge called him ‘fortunate’ and criticised the prosecution case.”

“To establish the offence of selling a device which is primarily designed, produced, or adapted for the purpose of enabling or facilitating the circumvention of effective technological measures, it must be shown that the technological measure concerned physically prevents infringement of copyright, and is not merely a discouragement or commercial hindrance to copyright infringement.The Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) so held in allowing an appeal by the defendant, Neil Stanley Higgs, against his conviction on 19 October 2007 in the Crown Court at Bristol before Her Honour Judge Hagen of 26 offences contrary to s 296ZB of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.”